Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2003. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: History is often manipulated to achieve contemporary goals. Writing or narrating history is not merely
a recoding or a narration of objective facts, but a value-laden process often conforming to the goals of
the writer or narrator. This study examines the ways in which the history of the Mabudu chiefdom has
been manipulated to achieve political goals. Through an analysis of the history of the Mabudu
chiefdom and the manner in which that history has been represented, this study illustrates that history is
not merely a collection of verifiable facts, but rather a collection of stories open to interpretation and
manipulation.
In the middle of the eighteenth century the Mabudu or Mabudu-Tembe was the strongest political and
economic unit in south-east Africa. Their authority only declined with state formation amongst the
Swazi and Zulu in the early nineteenth century. Although the Zulu never defeated the Mabudu, the
Mabudu were forced to pay tribute to the Zulu. In the 1980s the Prime Minister of KwaZulu,
Mangusotho Buthelezi, used this fact as proof that the people of Maputaland (Mabudu-land) should be
part of the Zulu nation-state.
By the latter part of the nineteenth century Britain, Portugal and the South African Republic laid claim
to Maputaland. In 1875 the French President arbitrated in the matter and drew a line along the current
South Africa/ Mozambique border that would divide the British and French spheres of influence in
south-east Africa. The line cut straight through the Mabudu chiefdom. In 1897 Britain formally
annexed what was then called AmaThongaland as an area independent of Zululand, which was
administered as ‘trust land’ for the Mabudu people. When deciding on a place for the Mabudu in its Grand Apartheid scheme, the South African
Government ignored the fact that the Mabudu were never defeated by the Zulu or incorporated into the
Zulu Empire. Until the late 1960s the government recognised the people of Maputaland as ethnically
Tsonga, but in 1976 Maputaland was incorporated into the KwaZulu Homeland and the people
classified as Zulu.
In 1982 the issue was raised again when the South African Government planned to cede Maputaland to
Swaziland. The government and some independent institutions launched research into the historic and
ethnic ties of the people of Maputaland. Based on the same historical facts, contrasting claims were
made about the historical and ethnic ties of the people of Maputaland.
Maputaland remained part of KwaZulu and is still claimed by the Zulu king as part of his kingdom.
The Zulu use the fact that the Mabudu paid tribute in the 1800s as evidence of their dominance. The
Mabudu, on the other hand, use the same argument to prove their independence, only stating that
tribute never meant subordination, but only the installation of friendly relations. This is a perfect
example of how the same facts can be interpreted differently to achieve different goals and illustrates
that history cannot be equated with objective fact.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/16366 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Kloppers, Roelie J. |
| Contributors | Grundlingh, A.M., University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of History. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en_ZA |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | ii, 113 leaves : ill., maps, ports. |
| Rights | University of Stellenbosch |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds